From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Alex Wang <alex(dot)wang(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Paul A Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Index AM API cleanup |
Date: | 2025-01-15 14:31:12 |
Message-ID: | f54c2af5-1d94-4577-98ff-c2ec8bd64702@eisentraut.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.12.24 15:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 27.11.24 13:57, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I think, however, that we should rename RowCompareType. Otherwise,
>> it's just going to be confusing forevermore. I suggest to rename it
>> simply to CompareType.
>
>> I'm going to try to code up the gist support on top of this patch set
>> to make sure that it will fit well. I'll report back.
>
> Here is a patch set in that direction. It renames RowCompareType to
> CompareType and updates the surrounding commentary a bit. And then I'm
> changing the gist strategy mapping to use the CompareType values instead
> of the RT* strategy numbers. Seeing this now, I like this a lot better
> than what we have now, because it makes it clearer in the API and the
> code what is a real strategy number and what's a different kind of
> thing. (This isn't entirely the above-mentioned integration of the gist
> support into your patch set yet, but it's a meaningful part of it.)
I have committed these, and I'll continue working my way through this
patch set now.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2025-01-15 14:40:42 | Re: Eager aggregation, take 3 |
Previous Message | Giampaolo Capelli | 2025-01-15 14:28:24 | Re: question about relation_open |